Hair transplant surgeon at clinic which treated Celtic players Leigh Griffiths and Anthony Stokes is struck off after botched procedure left patient’s hair growing back at right angles

• Juan Ruiz Alconero accused of botching patient’s hair so badly it grew at right angles
• The doctor was treating patients at KSL Hair Ltd in Glasgow without a licence
• He has been found guilty of serious misconduct and dishonesty at a tribunal

A hair transplant surgeon accused of botching a hair transplant so badly his patient’s hair grew back at right angles has been struck off.

Dr Juan Ruiz Alconero didn’t have a licence to practice when he was treating patients at KSL Hair Ltd (KSL) in Glasgow, whose previous customers include former Celtic stars Leigh Griffiths and Anthony Stokes.

The doctor was accused of letting his assistants perform much of the surgery, carrying out procedures without letting patients reconsider if they wanted to go ahead and failing to check up on them afterwards.

As part of multiple allegations of misconduct against the Spanish-qualified medic from four patients, one of them complained that after his transplant his hair regrew at a ’90 degree angle’.

The tribunal was unable to conclude from photos whether the hair had grown back at the alleged angle and whether Dr Alconero was to blame.

However, it did decide his ‘dishonest’ conduct was ‘fundamentally incompatible’ with continued registration and he was struck off from the profession.

Dr Ruiz Alconero was found guilty of serious misconduct and dishonesty at a tribunal

He was treating patients at KSL Hair Ltd (KSL) in Glasgow whose previous customers include former Celtic stars Leigh Griffiths and Anthony Stokes

The Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) committee heard Dr Alconero originally qualified in 1998 from Universidad de Alcala Facultad de Medicina in Madrid.

He moved to the UK and got a job performing hair transplant surgeries at KSL Hair Ltd (KSL) in Glasgow. 

Dr Alconero had not been granted General Medical Council (GMC) registration or obtained his licence to practice at the time of the incidents, the panel heard. 

The tribunal was told that in August 2016 Dr Alconero performed a hair transplant on a patient, known only as Patient A.

However, before he agreed, the medic did not offer a pre-operation consultation or a ‘cooling off period’ which is required to ‘go away, reflect and weigh up the risks and benefits, costs and the post operative period’.

Instead he went ahead with the procedure straight away even though an expert told the panel ‘it is not acceptable to carry out an invasive cosmetic, appearance changing hair transplant surgery without preoperative consultation.’

Patient A told the tribunal that after his hair op, he noticed ‘gaps’ in his hairline.

He said: ‘I decided to give it six months to see whether the grafts would take but as time went on I noticed I was not getting the results I had expected.

‘I had hair coming out at 90 degree angles and gaps in my hairline.’

The tribunal heard that hair re-growing at such an angle would be an ‘unacceptable’ complication.

However, on examination the panel were ‘unable to determine’ from the photographs whether the hair was growing as suggested and whether it was as a direct result of Dr Alconero’s surgery.

Dr Alconero did not attend the hearing in person. However, the panel was told he blamed KSL for ‘the process that he had to follow’ but accepted he had responsibility for his actions

The tribunal heard that in November 2016 before treating another patient, Patient B, Dr Alconero again failed to follow correct procedures.

Patient B told the panel: ‘After I had signed the necessary paperwork I sat in the waiting room for about 20 minutes when Dr Ruiz Alconero appeared wearing scrubs. 

‘Dr Ruiz Alconero introduced himself and informed me he would be conducting the procedure.

‘Dr Ruiz Alconero took out a marker pen and drew a line on my forehead and then asked me where I wanted the implants.

‘I was shocked by this comment as I had assumed Dr Ruiz Alconero would have been briefed beforehand about what I wanted doing and it was quite obvious I wanted the implants in the areas where I was going bald.’

Patient B also said they saw Dr Alconero ‘kept leaving the room’ whilst extracting hair follicles and he left altogether whilst the new hair grafts were implanted by a technician.

He said: ‘Dr Ruiz Alconero started doing the extraction and I could hear the extraction machine going over my head. I was experiencing a lot of pain due to a burning sensation and Dr Ruiz Alconero administered more injections to numb the area.

‘The extraction lasted about three hours and Dr Ruiz Alconero kept leaving the room and someone else would take over and then he would come back in.’

The tribunal heard the implants were then carried out, unsupervised, by the technician which it ruled was another failure to provide good clinical care.

She – rather than the doctor – then gave Patient B advice on how to protect his new hairline; another breach of procedures.

Patient B said: ‘Once the grafts had been implanted, [the technician] told me briefly about my aftercare – mainly that I should not use a power shower on my head for fear the implants could be dislodged.

‘I was provided with a blow up pillow, two absorbing pads and some Johnson’s baby shampoo to use.’

In November 2016, another patient, Patient C, went to KSL for a hair transplant and the panel found Dr Alconero did not ‘adequately explain the procedure’.

Once again, the tribunal found Dr Alconero did not offer a pre-op consultation and didn’t supervise the implantation of hair follicles.

After Patient C had complained about their hairline, Dr Alconero ‘punched a few holes on my forehead’ with an instrument whilst he was stood up, telling his assistant to ‘place hair grafts there’.

The fourth patient, Patient D, complained that during his procedure in November 2016 technicians – rather than Dr Alconero – gave him his anaesthetic, excised the grafts, extracted hair follicles and made incisions into his head.

This, the tribunal said, was ‘wholly inappropriate’.

Dr Alconero did not attend the hearing in person. However, the panel was told he blamed KSL for ‘the process that he had to follow’ but accepted he had responsibility for his actions.

In a submission, he said: ‘Of course, HT (hair transplants) and medics in general are not an exact science, and I cannot be responsible for the aftercare and controls not done by me.’

Finding him guilty of serious misconduct and dishonesty, chair of the panel, Linda Lee, said: ‘The tribunal considered that Dr Ruiz Alconero’s actions put patients at risk of harm.

‘The tribunal also concluded that Dr Ruiz Alconero’s conduct brought the medical profession into disrepute and he breached fundamental tenets of the profession.

‘Having determined that Dr Ruiz Alconero’s conduct was fundamentally incompatible with continued registration, the tribunal considered erasure was the only appropriate and proportionate sanction to protect the public interest, mark the seriousness of the misconduct and protect public confidence in the profession.

‘We were of the view the sanction of erasure would send a message to the profession that Dr Ruiz Alconero’s conduct was wholly unacceptable and fell far short of the conduct and the standards of behaviour expected of a registered doctor.’

The Glasgow branch of KSL Hair has now closed down.

Source: Read Full Article